show_tools

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing any behavioral traits such as persistence, side effects, permissions, or scope. For a tool that modifies visibility state, this lack of detail is a notable gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose without unnecessary verbosity. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, with the parenthetical 'restore' adding clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple nature of the tool and the schema's full parameter coverage, the description provides the minimal necessary context. However, it lacks any mention of return values, additional behavior, or how it interacts with hide_tools, making it only minimally complete for an agent with no other context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema provides 100% coverage for both parameters (all and tools) with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: showing or restoring hidden tools. The verb 'show/restore' and resource 'hidden tools' are specific. It implicitly differentiates from the sibling 'hide_tools' as the inverse operation, though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not state when to use this tool vs. hide_tools or any other sibling, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent is left to infer context from the name and description.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.